 | Home > General & Technical (L663) > GAP Diagnostic IIDTool Announcement |
 
|
|
|
| forzahog Member Since: 03 Nov 2022 Location: Fayetteville Posts: 66   
|
Will this be an update to the firmware of the IID tool or a new hardware version of the IID tool itself? Cheers, Kyle 20MY Defender 110 Fuji White |
||
26th Sep 2023 5:21pm |
|
| Hairy Dan Member Since: 25 Apr 2013 Location: NW Durham Posts: 1414  
|
Sorry for the late reply I don't seem to be getting updates to this thread for some reason. I did compare the ccf file before and after and there doesn't appear to be any changes, ie the things that needed changing were changed but I didn't have the error after it was done via Pathfinder, which is confusing. I did try and look over David's shoulder when he was doing the updates but he has his laptop and Pathfinder system set to the Chinese language  Cheers Ian
-------------------- 22MY Defender 110 D200 SE, Fuji White. Kielder 4x4 Safari Instagram @defender_v8 |
||
|
26th Sep 2023 6:02pm |
|
| Hairy Dan Member Since: 25 Apr 2013 Location: NW Durham Posts: 1414
|
Bob see the answer in the above post 
But yes it is only a software change. Cheers Ian -------------------- 22MY Defender 110 D200 SE, Fuji White. Kielder 4x4 Safari Instagram @defender_v8 |
||
|
26th Sep 2023 6:04pm |
|
| chpsk8 Member Since: 26 Sep 2023 Location: Midwest Posts: 42
|
@stevemfr
First, thank you for all the efforts you and your team put into this tool. It has proven its value to many of us. I'm a relatively new user and have a couple questions about the errors that a lot of us see with braking errors and 2WD only when we make some of these changes. I find it interesting/frustrating that some users don't get these errors, while others do. Comparisons of CCF files don't show anything obviously different, so some are stuck without being able to make some of these changes. ATPC for one: One change to CCF available and it works for some, but not others. But if they use Pathfinder they can clear the error, or make it stick... Do you have any tips for those of us that can't make that change stick without errors? Is there something else we should try changing to make those changes? Does it have to do with the stock configuration of some of the builds? for instance, my vehicle was spec'd with 18" rims. Does that change the brake config so I get this error? I'm more than excited to hear more development is happening on ACC and Parking. I'm equally concerned I'll get a braking error or 2WD error. Crossing fingers when those are released (assuming firmware update) that we'll all get it. Thank you for all the work you and your team does to give us tools like this. |
||
|
26th Sep 2023 10:06pm |
|
| malibu Member Since: 11 Sep 2023 Location: Melbourne Posts: 49 
|
I am guessing, but I feel this project is very large. ie trying to reverse engineer all settings for a range of vehicles that each have there unique features using the same software. I also then modules need to be recalibrated/updated after some settings are changed. Therefore I would imagine GAP would be working on them either as one at a time or grouping like issues to resolve. Then needing to test the solution on a range of vehicles. This is a very time consuming task.
It appears they are making ACC and Auto Parking as the priority, which I would imagine would make the most users happy. After that I am hoping they will look at the Auto TR and ATPC and TA2 for the Discovery. I think they are also working on making changes update quicker. ie some people have made changes, but they haven't shown on the screen for several days. I am really impressed with the work so far. It is amazing that they are giving us the ability to change so many settings, and yet nothing is being broken. The worst we get is a 2wd or brake error, that fixes itself when we reverse the settings. So I think we all need to be patient and thank GAP for making such an amazing product. If you have time at GAP, it would be great if you could maybe outline your developement plans, so we have an idea of what features maybe comming next. Thank you so much. |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 3:23am |
|
| mmbanf Member Since: 16 Mar 2021 Location: Milano Posts: 163 
|
hi, from what I have learned in this time, no one (I think) has managed to enable the auto TR or ATPC function, only users who already had a standard configuration with "auto configurable TR" have ATPC enabled.
so there is probably something in the factory configuration that we are missing. second thing, every error that occurs is always somehow related to the detected speed of the wheel, (change in tire size, Auto TR, Atpc, Acc, Brake diameter) in fact, as can be seen from this photo by ccf editor, also the tpms calibration is involved in the setup. I tried to change the tpms calibration value, unfortunately without success, but it is strange that in the file of our multican-581 cars, tpms cal is repeated three times... two text and one hexadecimal.  Click image to enlarge |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 5:39am |
|
| mmbanf Member Since: 16 Mar 2021 Location: Milano Posts: 163
|
hi, I see two ccfs relating to speed detection, have you tried changing both? MultiCAN-838 Speedo Market Market 0 (+3.5% +2km/h) MultiCAN-577 SpdoCalPercentScale 3.5% Scaling Marco |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 5:48am |
|
| malibu Member Since: 11 Sep 2023 Location: Melbourne Posts: 49
|
Hi @mmbanf,
Great info. Maybe we can ask people on this forum if they can confirm your assumption. I was woundering if anybody that has been able to activate ATPC can confirm if they have Auto TR pre installed. |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 6:02am |
|
| mmbanf Member Since: 16 Mar 2021 Location: Milano Posts: 163
|
hello, I asked a user who successfully enabled "Atpc control", he confirmed that he already had a "configurable tr" as original equipment.
Marco |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 6:19am |
|
| malibu Member Since: 11 Sep 2023 Location: Melbourne Posts: 49
|
I am sure you are correct, but I think there are several people on hear that have been successful, it might be good to have a 2nd person confirm, as it could also be something else.
|
||
|
27th Sep 2023 6:22am |
|
| lightning Member Since: 23 Apr 2009 Location: High Peak, Derbyshire Posts: 2752
|
As l see it there's obviously something else that needs to be changed, like when you alter the speedometer accuracy and it doesn't change the cruise control.
On this setting you just end up with the cruise control reading incorrectly but on the terrain response system it's clearly generating an error of calibration. On the old TD5 Defender you can add cruise control and it works perfectly. But if you then add overdrive, the cruise won't work with it engaged because the system is seeing the incorrect data from the speed sensors. |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 7:06am |
|
| malibu Member Since: 11 Sep 2023 Location: Melbourne Posts: 49
|
I think when we change CCF codes, sometimes the GAP tool runs a supporting functions that triggers a calibration or update of module/s. I tihnk these are being built by GAP, but I imagine each takes time and they need to prioritise. Maybe cars with Auto TR don't need the supporting function for ATPC as it is already set. I am confident that over time, the GAP tool will allow us to configure the items we require.
We need to keep in mind the ability to modify Pivi Pro cars was only released a few months ago. It is amazing it does so much already. |
||
|
27th Sep 2023 7:20am |
|
| stevemfr Member Since: 18 Sep 2022 Location: Strasbpurg Posts: 137 
|
Hi guys,
The problem is, that we as a small company do not have access to all models and all configurations of every Land Rover available worldwide. We actually rely on our users to provide feedback - people like Hairy Dan or Marco or many others who do a terrific job of trying things and compiling information. 
When we started this a little over 10 years ago, more often than not CCF changes required only changing a single setting in one ECU. Now all systems are interlaced. And the problem is that LR is not giving this info out and if we were to do the R&D to make all of this work out of the box, the IIDTool would cost easily 3+ times what it now costs. We do our best to make the IIDTool as easy and foolproof to use as possible with 'Restore' functions, etc. But there is a limit to what we can reasonably offer. And thanks for the kudos from everyone!
RRC 2Dr, RRC 4Dr, P38, and 2 L322s, 2 FL1s and a L663 on the way |
||
|
28th Sep 2023 10:25am |
|
| chpsk8 Member Since: 26 Sep 2023 Location: Midwest Posts: 42
|
Thanks @stevemfr for the information. Since we are in essence crowd sourcing the errors, is there anything that we could do to organize the data that would help your team?
I understand the layering of processes that JLR has in it's programing, we see that more and more of that in my industry as well. It's not as easy as turning over one rock to find the answer anymore. If there's anything we can add to our findings as we receive errors I'm sure the user groups would be on board to tag on some additional data if that helps your process. |
||
|
28th Sep 2023 1:14pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
